Recall, from the Hieroglyphs and
Hypotheses section of this research, that words have meanings and perceptions
embedded into them, and that in a different culture a word my have a
completely different meaning and perception from the meaning and perception it
has in your culture. So when an author, be it a scholar or layperson, writes
that the pyramids were tombs or graves, just what does the author mean, and
how does the reader interpret the words tomb and grave, and how does the
author's meaning, and the reader's interpretation, compare with the meanings
and perceptions embedded into the words by the culture about which the author
is writing?

Recall, the following, from the Pyramids
and Symbols section of this research. "Symbols, like words, which are
also symbols, have meanings embedded into them, and, like language, symbols
have a perception embedded into them. In order to understand what is conveyed
by a particular symbol, such as a pyramid, we must know the meaning and
perception embedded into the symbol by the culture that created that
symbol."

The Complete Pyramids: solving the
ancient mysteries --- Lehner

Quoting from the back inside cover.
"Mark Lehner is Visiting Assistant Professor of Egyptian Archaeology at
the Oriental Institute, University of Chicago, and a Research Associate at the
Harvard Semitic Museum. From 1979 to 1983 he directed the Sphinx and Isis
Temple Project and since 1984 he has been director of the Giza Plateau Mapping
Project.

In the following quote note that M.
Lehner states "far more than just the grave of a king."

9/1/1, M. Lehner wrote, "It is true
that the pyramids are pharaonic tombs, but the tomb of a pharaoh of ancient
Egypt was far more than just the grave of a king."

9/2/2-last "When the Egyptians built
the pyramids, they also founded new farms, ranches and whole new towns in the
provinces. The livestock and produce from these estates flowed into the area
of the pyramid complex where they were redistributed to the work force and to
the priests and special classes of people who served the temple complex. So
the pyramid was also an economic engine, and, especially during the Old
Kingdom, a major catalyst for internal colonization and the development of
Egypt as one of the world's first true states."

M. Lehner refers to the pyramid as a
"cosmic engine," saying, at 20/1/4-7, "...in fact, each pyramid
ensured the rule of universal order, the turning of the days and seasons, and
the flooding of the Nile. The mechanics of the pyramid as cosmic engine
depended on the Egyptian concept of a person and the distinct phases of life
and death, called kheperu. These 'transformations' continued when the ka, the
ba and the body, which had become separated at death, interacted in the final
transformation - becoming an akh, a glorified being of light, effective in the
Afterlife. The pyramid was an instrument that enabled this alchemy to take
place for the pharaoh, who had ruled as the god incarnate, and allowed that
incarnation to pass from father to son, from Osiris to Horus. Encapsulating
the dangerous interface between cosmic order and the terrible formlessness of
time before the beginning, the pyramid is better understood as the meeting
point of life and light with death and darkness."

Where did M. Lehner get his "cosmic
engine" idea?

20/1/8-last, "Our earliest insight
into such ideas comes from the Pyramid Texts, written on the walls of pyramid
chambers beginning with Unas in the 5th dynasty. These texts speak to us of
what the pyramid meant as an icon and offer glimpses of the burial ceremonies
for the god-king and the rituals that were carried out once his mortal remains
had been mummified and entombed, setting the cosmic engine in motion."

22/2/4 "For them [the ancient
Egyptians] death was not the end, but just one of the transformations in
life's natural cycle."

At 24/1/2 M. Lehner writes, "For the
king, the pyramid was the place of ascension and transformation."

At 24/2/1 M. Lehner writes, "The
names of the pyramids show that they were perceived as places of ascension and
transformation."

Clearly, the meanings and perceptions
embedded into a pyramid were not one of a tomb or a grave as defined by us.

At 13/5/4, M. Lehner wrote, "The
pyramids no longer connect with living Egypt and so we have lost sight of
their original role in ancient Egypt." M. Lehner continues, at 13/4/5,
"But from the Mokkatam Hills, there is still the sense of the pyramid
field as one vast Memphite necropolis, the pyramids standing as giant
tombstones of distance god-kings." Clearly, "tombstones" is not
what the pyramids represented to the ancient Egyptians: it is not how the
ancient Egyptians would have seen the pyramids. To refer to the pyramid as
"tombstones," or as a tomb, or as a grave is simple non-sense.

Now contrast M. Lehner's image of the
pyramids as "tombstones" with his statement of 9/3. "The
complete pyramid played many roles: massive labor project; baker and brewer
for hundreds of consumers; colonizer of the Egyptian provinces; employer of
farmers, herdsmen and craftsmen of all kinds; temple and ritual center at the
core of the Egyptian state; reliquary of a king; embodiment of light and
shadow; and the union of death and rebirth." Clearly, these are part of
what the pyramids represented to the ancient Egyptians: part of the
perceptions embedded into the pyramids.

Architecture And People --- Raskin

In 1974, Eugene Raskin was Adjunct
Professor of Architecture at Columbia University, and author of several books.

83/1 "When we speak of a building as
expressing this or that we are clearly assuming that architecture, in addition
to its functional tasks, is also a medium of communication. It conveys
meaning, just as these words, printed on this paper, convey --- it is hoped
--- meanings. Of course, those who have the meanings to convey, in this case
the architects, and those who 'read' the messages must possess some common
knowledge of the language being used. For people who have been brought up in
the same society this is a simple matter; they acquire their knowledge without
effort, just as they learn to speak. A person from another culture, say an
aboriginal tribesman from the South Pacific, might have the same difficulty
understanding our architecture that he has with our language, costumes, and
moral standards. He probably would not be able to tell a church from a post
office. In fact, he would not know what a church is, let alone a post office.
But if it is your own culture, one you have been raised in and perhaps have
had a hand in shaping, you not only understand the basic statements made by
buildings, such as 'I am a church' or 'I am a gas station,' you also can read
modifying comments and nuances..."

When M. Lehner saw the pyramids as
"tombstones," he was seeing the pyramids as though he were looking
through the eyes of an "aboriginal tribesman from the South
Pacific," not as an Egyptian from ancient Egypt.

The endless procession of scholars who
continually see the pyramids as tombs or graves are also seeing the pyramids
as though they were looking through the eyes of an "aboriginal tribesmen
from the South Pacific," not as an Egyptian from ancient Egypt.

Until we know the meanings and
perceptions embedded into the language and symbols of the ancient Egyptians,
we cannot re-create the state of mind or truly understand the motives of human
society 5000 years ago, but it should be apparent that their motives were not
purely religious, and were not purely political, and were not purely economic.
A pyramid had religious, political, and economic meanings and perceptions
embedded into them by the culture that created them --- the ancient Egyptian
culture. We must see with the eyes of an ancient Egyptian, not with the eyes
of an "aborigional tribesman from the South Pacific."